Throughout the DUI court process, which may take months and involve several court hearings, prosecutors and defense lawyers negotiate the terms of a plea bargain. Prosecutors want the accused to plead guilty to a DUI and suffer consequences such as fines, DUI school and even jail time. The defense wants to avoid conviction and avoid these consequences.
By fighting a DUI charge and attacking the state's evidence, the defense increases the chances the D.A. or the judge will offer a "better deal." Two primary factors give the accused leverage. The first is the extent to which he can establish DUI defenses that reduce the likelihood of a conviction if the case goes to trial.
]]> The second factor that pressures judges and prosecutors to make concessions is the sheer congestion of the court's calendar. Sometimes not enough courtrooms and prosecutors exist to handle the volume of DUI cases headed to trial. This is when simple supply and demand kicks in. The state is forced to offer better deals in order to settle cases and relieve this congestion quickly.]]>Driving under the influence of drugs is often referred to as "DUID" or "California DUI of Drugs." Some of these cases involve suspects arrested for driving while intoxicated by illicit drugs such as methamphetamine, crack cocaine or LSD.
But an increasing number of California DUI cases involve suspects driving while taking prescription drugs, even lawfully prescribed drugs. The two biggest trends we're seeing in DUID law are DUI Ambien and DUI Vicodin cases.
Many of the DUI Ambien cases involve "sleep driving." A person goes to sleep after taking ambien and maybe also a glass of wine, and wakes to find herself having driven somewhere while in a drug-induced trance. Most of the DUI Vicodin cases involve a person prescribed vocidin as a pain-killer after an injury or a surgery. He continues to drive as he normally does, but gets pulled over and cited for DUI.
Some people mistakenly think they can't be prosecuted for DUID if the drugs were prescribed by their doctor. Not so. California DUI law prohibits driving when your faculties are impaired by any substance: legal or illegal, illicit or prescribed. Nevertheless, a good DUI attorney can often find problems in the evidence and exploit them to get a DUID charge reduced or dismissed.
The consequences for a person convicted of felony DUI are significantly more serious. First, a misdemeanor DUI carries only a maximum sentence of six months to a year of county jail--though most offenders do little or no jail time. By contrast, a felony DUI can land a person in California state prison for 3 years of longer. Second, a felony DUI conviction resulting in probation will require felony probation and formal supervision by a probation officer.
Prosecutors may charge felony DUI in only three instances. First, a California DUI causing injury or death may be filed as a felony (or in more serious death cases, vehicular manslaughter). Second, a Fourth Time DUI may be charged as a felony. Finally, if a person has a prior felony DUI conviction for any reason, any subsequent DUI charge may be filed as a felony.
Like with all criminal cases, felony DUI often gets plea-bargained down. A prosecutor may start a case by filing the charge as a felony. But after recognizing weaknesses in the evidence, and negotiating with defense counsel, he/she often will agree to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor in exchange for a guilty or "no contest" plea.
]]>In short, DUI requires that the suspect’s mental and physical faculties be impaired—at least to the extent that he can no longer operate a motor vehicle with the same skill and caution of a sober person. Whereas Penal Code 647f Drunk in Public requires that the suspect be extremely intoxicated—so much so that he can no longer safely care for himself or others, even while just walking around.
The DUI standard of intoxication remains somewhat nebulous and the subject of much debate—both scientific and political. California sets a per se BAC limit of .08 for drivers. But most experts agree that some people who are sensitive to alcohol can become impaired at a much lower level, in some cases as low as a .02 BAC. On the other hand, some individuals with a higher tolerance for alcohol can maintain sober-like faculties at a .10 BAC or higher.
In any case, one doesn’t need to be drunk to fall within the purview of California’s DUI laws. A low to moderate degree of intoxication can trigger and arrest and possible conviction. “Drunk driving” is therefore a misnomer. “Impaired driving” would better describe the standard.
Penal Code 647f, by contrast, is triggered only when the suspect is flat-out drunk. One could be well within the range of intoxication for DUI purposes, but well below the range for “drunk in public” purposes. This difference in standard makes sense. A person could create a hazard just by walking around in public sufficiently inebriated. But that hazard exists much sooner when the person combines alcohol and driving.
The SCRAM is a tamper-proof device that a person wears around his ankle. It measures alcohol from the wearer's sweat emitted throughout the day. The device then transmits the reading to a regional monitoring center--which reports the results to the court.
Many counties require the SCRAM device for repeat DUI offenders or very egregious cases. However, Riverside County looks to be one of the first to be seeking this penalty even in 1st time DUI cases where no accident is involved.
According to Riverside DUI attorney Michael Scafiddi, Riverside County is one of the more strict places in the state when it comes to drunk driving prosecutions. The local courts routinely impose 6 to 10 days jail even in 1st offense Riverside DUI cases--although most people can serve these days doing labor as opposed to actual time in the Riverside County Jail.
The SCRAM device can be an effective tool for courts to treat defendants with serious alcohol problems. But it may be an excessive requirement for many 1st time DUI offenders...not to mention an invasion of the person's privacy and a substantial expense (as the defendant must pay the cost of the program).
Most people know the routine that follows a California DUI conviction: probation, fines, a temporary drivers license suspension, and--of course--the infamous California DUI school.
Indeed, California has developed an elaborate series of alcohol education programs for DUI offenders. These range from a 12-hour class for those convicted of a lesser "wet reckless" offense, to a 30-month alcohol program for 3rd offense DUI offenders. Los Angeles County's 30-month DUI school can entail up to 400 hours of community service, group counseling and education sessions.
The California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs licenses private entities to provide this drunk driving programming. Nearly 500 exist throughout the state. One overarching policy goal is at work: dissuading those convicted of DUI from continuing to drink and drive.
Very little data exists to measure the effectiveness of California DUI schools. Probably, as with any type of rehabilitation program, success varies depending on the individual--and in particular whether the student sees herself as having an alcohol problem that needs addressing.
]]> One distinguishing feature of California's DUI education is that all of the classes are live events. Students actually attend classes and interact with each other and live instructors. Some states, such as Nevada, only require "online" DUI school. Although advocacy groups there--such as Las Vegas-based Stop DUI --are pushing for legislation that would require Nevada DUI offenders to meet live with DUI victims and their families.Intuitively, one would imagine that live DUI programming changes more behavior than online videos and self-study. But again, few reliable studies can verify this. And if some adults resent the alcohol classes as a nuisance imposed on them--rather than a welcome opportunity to receive help and guidance--then the purpose could backfire.
]]>Prosecutors allege that Garza was driving through a winding stretch of El Camino Real near Rancho Santa Fe when his vehicle collided with a parked SUV owned by Gaudencio Reyes-Quintana. Reyes-Quintana’s vehicle was stuck in the mud, and California Highway Patrol officers believe that Reyes-Quintana was standing outside of the vehicle when Garza crashed.
Garza’s attorney notes that the vicinity was foggy that night with areas of drizzle, which along with curvy roads and limited sight lines may have contributed to the car accident. Garza himself was unconscious when police officers arrived at the scene.
]]> His vehicle, a Dodge Caliber, was found in a nearby swamp. Police believe Garza’s automobile went airborne after striking Reyes-Quintana’s immobilized SUV. Garza sustained light injuries in the auto accident and is being held in the Vista jail with bail set at $350,000.DUI charges in California have serious circumstances and worth the attention of a legal specialist. DUI cases can be very challenging, as the prosecution often ignores other contributing facts in automobile accidents where alcohol is involved. A California DUI defense lawyer understands the nuances of a drunken driving accident in California and is able to mount an effective defense against a DUI.
Are you or someone you care for facing a DUI charge? Contact us for a case consultation.
]]>According to the prosecution, late on January 13, 2008, Avary missed a turn and crashed his vehicle into a telephone pole. The impact killed one passenger, Andreas Zini, a family friend; and injured another passenger, Avary’s wife Maria.
Avary has been charged with manslaughter and two felony counts of causing bodily injury while intoxicated. Gross vehicular manslaughter carries a potential prison term of 2 to 6 years, depending on the relevant circumstances of the case.
]]> Combined with the felony injury charges, Avary could spend over a decade in prison if convicted. A pretrial conference has been scheduled for February.The Avary case illustrates how seriously the authorities regard drunken driving cases that result in fatalities and injuries. Expert consultation is strongly recommended given the significant amount of prison time, fines and other penalties that could be levied against someone charged with DUI related offenses. The strong public reaction to the news of fatal DUI accidents often puts pressure on law enforcement and other officials, which can unfairly impact the outcome of a given case.
Are you or some one you care for facing a driving under the influence charge? You need the assistance of an experienced DUI attorney. Contact us for a case consultation.
]]>In Los Angeles County, CHP reported 202 DUI arrests over the New Year holiday period, 30 less than last year’s total DUI arrest figures for the county. In Orange County, 11 fewer arrests were made for DUI during the holiday. These numbers follow a general trend of lower DUI numbers during the past year. Total DUI arrests for 2008 are 986, down from 1082 in 2007.
]]> Balanced against this welcome news are the troubling potential consequences of some drunken driving enforcement policies. Over the Christmas holiday, the joint-manned CHP and US Marine San Bernadino drunk driving checkpoint raised eyebrows and concerns about constitutional legality. Since 1878, military personnel, including military police, are not allowed to assist domestic police except by Congressional order or by the direct order of the President of the United States. This restriction is clearly spelled out in Title 18 of the United States Code, and is referred to as Posse Comitatus.Although no doubt well intentioned, a joint effort of the United States armed forces and domestic law enforcement raises serious concerns about civil rights and the Constitutional protection of civil rights. Of more immediate concern is the legality of any arrests made by the members of this particular checkpoint. Can a Los Angeles DUI attorney successfully argue for a dismissal in this case?
]]>In September 2008, according to Reuters, a California Highway Patrol officer responding to a 911 call arrested the actress after finding her car blocking a traffic lane near Montecito. Breath tests failed to indicate the presence of alcohol, and she was charged with driving under the influence of drugs.
California law makes no real distinction between impairment caused by prescription medication such as anti-depressants and cold medicines, and impairment caused by illegal drugs such as cocaine or marijuana. Also, a California DUI drugs charge carries a more significant social stigma than drunk driving. Clearly a lot is at stake for anyone facing a DUI drugs charge.
]]> Locklear’s plea bargain is a good example of what a dedicated DUI defense lawyer can accomplish for a client. As a result of her plea bargain, Locklear must serve three years of informal probation, complete a 12-hour drug education program, and pay a $700 fine.At first glance, it seems the punishments are very similar to those of a first-time DUI conviction. However, the misdemeanor reckless driving charge carries several advantages for the client. Reckless driving pleas eliminate the required suspension of driving privileges that a DUI conviction entails. Also, the fine is approximately half what it could be in a DUI conviction. If Locklear’s reckless driving plea was treated as a “dry reckless” conviction, the conviction will not be priorable—that is, it may not be treated as a prior offense should she be charged with another DUI in the next 10 years.
Facing a driving under the influence of drugs charge? Contact us for a case consultation.
]]>The client was stopped for allegedly weaving. He subsequently took a roadside breath test with results of .14 and .15 BAC. He was charged in the Ventura County courts with Vehicle Code 23152 (a) and Vehicle Code 23152 (b) driving under the influence.
Oxnard police had arrested the motorist on August 15, 2008, stating in the police report that he was observed weaving and tailgating. Ventura County DUI lawyer Darrell York cross-examined the officer at a California DMV hearing. The officer gave inconsistent testimony, saying he didn’t observe weaving but that the client was driving in an unmarked bicycle lane—a claim attorney York was able to discredit.
Attorney Darrell York visited the scene of the traffic stop, and discovered that there was no such “unmarked bicycle lane,” as the officer had testified.
In court, attorney York brought a Penal Code 1538.5 motion to suppress all evidence stemming from the traffic stop. The judge granted the motion, and the DUI case was then dismissed.
Prior to becoming a DUI defense attorney, Darrell York worked as a police officer himself and conducted more than 1000 drunk driving investigations. He routinely uses DMV hearings as a vehicle for cross-examining police officers and challenging their accounts of DUI arrests. This litigation tactic has led to some DUI cases being dismissed, and others settled on terms more favorable to the client.
Details of the incident and the exact nature of Rothman’s act that lead to the arrest are not reported in the article and the Pomona City Manager’s office has not released a statement yet. It is understood that Rothman is a veteran city official, who has served in the City Council for 12 years.
This incident could certainly turn into a major setback for Rothman. Any time a city official, who most of us associate with upholding and enforcing the law, is accused of breaking the law, he or she is placed in a vulnerable position. This arrest is definitely tarnished Rothman’s reputation. The course this case takes could depend on the nature of the incident and the seriousness of the charges. The fact that this is a misdemeanor indicates that there were no serious injuries involved in the incident, which led to his arrest.
Rothman would be well-advised to seek the counsel of an experienced Southern California drunk driving defense attorney. If you have been arrested and accused of driving under the influence, we can help you. A DUI conviction could result in suspension of your driving privilege, hefty fines and penalties and possibly jail time. Repeat offenders will face even more serious consequences. Call us today to schedule your free consultation and discuss your legal options.
Christenson will be sentenced next month and faces a 12-year state prison term. However, the murder charge against him is expected to be dismissed, the news report said. In California, vehicular manslaughter that does not involve gross negligence may be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the circumstances. But, vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence is always charged as a felony and the court could impose up to 10 years of prison time as opposed to much lesser jail time for charges that do not involve gross negligence.
The article does not say if the charges against Christenson contain gross negligence, but based on the stiff prison term he faces, it certainly seems that it involves the more serious charge. Gross negligence is defined as driving without caution and without concern for the safety of others and generally has the driver exhibiting a high level of recklessness.
If you have been charged with DUI and vehicular manslaughter in California you definitely need the services of a first tier law firm to represent you and have your case defended successfully. Please contact me for a free consultation and to learn more about how we defend vehicular manslaughter allegations.
The 38-year-old woman suffered injuries after she was dragged by Kusmuk down the 500 block of Merritt Avenue in Camarillo, officials said. The woman, who walked into St. Johns Pleasant Valley Hospital, had injuries on her body consistent with someone who had been dragged, the article stated. The woman had reportedly been holding on to Kusmuk’s car during an argument with friends to prevent them from getting away when Kusmuk drove off and dragged her with her vehicle. Kusmuk was arrested later that night based on the woman’s complaint.
Drunk driving cases may be charges as misdemeanors or felonies. A felony is a more serious charge. You could be charged with felony DUI if the incident involves major or even moderate injuries to others. If your DUI accident involves fatalities, then you could be charged with vehicular manslaughter. In some cases DUI defendants, who have had prior DUI convictions, face murder charges in connection with fatal accidents.
If you have been accused of driving under the influence of alcohol, recreational drugs or prescription drugs, please consult an experienced and knowledgeable Southern California drunk driving defense attorney immediately. You stand to lose your driving privilege, your freedom and even your livelihood if you are convicted on DUI charges. Please do not try to handle your DUI charges without the guidance of a skilled criminal defense attorney. The consequences of attempting to do so may be catastrophic.
California Highway Patrol spokesman Tom Marshall said CHP had taken Locklear into custody after responding to a 911 report of a woman driving erratically the afternoon of September, 28, 2008 in a Montecito parking lot. Officials reportedly discovered Locklear’s car parked on State Route 192 and found she was disoriented and “under the influence of something.” She was booked on charges of driving while impaired and being under the influence of a controlled substance. While Locklear tested negative for alcohol at the CHP’s Santa Barbara-area office, the results of the drug test are pending.
This case was widely publicized in the media because it involved a famous actress. But driving under the influence is one of the most common offenses in California and the rest of the United States. A DUI conviction can have serious effects on an individual’s life and career. As opposed to celebrities who move on with their lives, a normal person suffers grave consequences including loss of driver’s license, severe fines and penalties and possible jail time.
If you have been accused of driving under the influence, you need an experienced Southern California DUI defense attorney who will aggressively fight for your rights. If you have been arrested on suspicion of DUI, please call us for a free consultation.
]]>